User profile for Ben Mills

Thanks Jeff. That's a great idea. / comments

Thanks Jeff. That's a great idea.

0 votes

I spoke to the engineer at my web hosting company (aspwebhosting.com). They made it very clear that giving any user access to the syslogins table is a very bad thing that allows someone to see all the usernames. A hacker then only needs to guess the passwords for each login (he described it as giving someone half the combination to the safe). That really makes a lot of sense to me and I understand why they are not willing to give me that permission. I really think that there should be an option that eliminates the calls to the syslogins table if I'm not trying to sync the logins. All I want to do is sync the tables and stored procedures. Thanks, Ben / comments

I spoke to the engineer at my web hosting company (aspwebhosting.com). They made it very clear that giving any user access to the syslogins table is a very bad thing that allows someone to see all...

0 votes

I'm not sure I fully understand the explanation of why this won't work with SQL Server 2005. Did you try the same test with a SQL Server 2005 database? I would be very interested to see the results as I have the option to switch to SQL Server 2005 at my web hosting company. Thanks, Ben / comments

I'm not sure I fully understand the explanation of why this won't work with SQL Server 2005. Did you try the same test with a SQL Server 2005 database? I would be very interested to see the resul...

0 votes

Thanks Jeff, that could work for me. Like you say, it's not ideal, but at least I could generate a SQL script to make the schema changes. Unfortunately, it doesn't work for SQL Data Compare, which I like to use to get a local copy of the data to work with. SQL Data Compare also seems to need access to the master database. I'm really lost without these tools. I've got so used to these tools being part of my development process that it's REALLY hard to lose them. Ben / comments

Thanks Jeff, that could work for me. Like you say, it's not ideal, but at least I could generate a SQL script to make the schema changes. Unfortunately, it doesn't work for SQL Data Compare, which...

0 votes

Thanks for the help. I guess I'll move to a different hosting company that gives me SQL Server 2005. / comments

Thanks for the help. I guess I'll move to a different hosting company that gives me SQL Server 2005.

0 votes

So if I move to hosting with a SQL Server 2005, then I'll only need permissions on my own database? I'm sure there are technical reasons that you need to access the master database, but I can see why some web hosting companies would not want to give me any permissions to the master database. Hopefully moving to 2005 will help. Thanks, Ben / comments

So if I move to hosting with a SQL Server 2005, then I'll only need permissions on my own database? I'm sure there are technical reasons that you need to access the master database, but I can see w...

0 votes

Thanks for the update. The explanation makes sense, though I wonder why people would want to put their data in an inconsistent state. I'm synchronizing all the tables with this batch file: SQLDataCompare.exe /server1:Production /database1:mydatabase1 /username1:myusername1 /password1:mypassword1 /server2:localhost /database2:mydatabase2 /out:DataCompareResults.txt /scriptfile:DataCompareSynchronize.sql /force /options:Default /synchronize > DataCompareOutput.txt Some of the tables are lookup tables, where none of the data is changing day to day. I wonder if these qualify as "not being migrated". Anyway, thanks for all the help. Despite my moaning about this issue, SQL Compare and SQL Data Compare are great products that have become an indispensible part of my development process. Ben Mills / comments

Thanks for the update. The explanation makes sense, though I wonder why people would want to put their data in an inconsistent state. I'm synchronizing all the tables with this batch file: SQLDat...

0 votes

Hi Brian, I don't see how this is by design. Surely a tool to sync data shouldn't be changing the schema in any way. The problem for me is that I use a modelling tool (Dezign for Databases) to generate new versions of the schema into an empty database. I then sync that database with my development copy to get the schema changes (whilst leaving the data in place in the development copy). The tool creates the foreign keys without the WITH NOCHECK option and then SQL Data Compare is trying to set the WITH NOCHECK option. The result is a battle between one tool trying to remove the option and the other trying to add it. I can ignore these differences, but I think that this is a bug that should be fixed in the next version. Thanks for the help, Ben / comments

Hi Brian, I don't see how this is by design. Surely a tool to sync data shouldn't be changing the schema in any way. The problem for me is that I use a modelling tool (Dezign for Databases) to gen...

0 votes

Hi Brian, I realize this is a strange one and seems to be hard to reproduce, but this has only started since I switched to SQL Compare 5. Here's what I'm going to do now: 1. I ran a compare using the UI and saw the differences. 2. I ran the sync. 3. I closed the UI and reopened. 4. I ran another compare and everything matches. 5. I will not touch the schema of either database. 6. Let's see what happens tonight when I run the compare and sync script. Thanks for taking the time to look into this. As I said, I realize this is a hrad one for you to reproduce. Ben / comments

Hi Brian, I realize this is a strange one and seems to be hard to reproduce, but this has only started since I switched to SQL Compare 5. Here's what I'm going to do now: 1. I ran a compare using...

0 votes

I think I may have figured out what the problem is. Here's my sequence of events: 1. Compare and sync A with B using SQL Compare. 2. Compare schemas again and everything matches. 3. Compare and sync DATA in A with B using SQL Data Compare. 4. Compare schemas again and there are WITH NOCHECK discrepancies. It seems that SQL Data Compare is causing schema changes. I seem to remember reading that SQL Data Compare has a new algorithm that disables the foreign keys before copying data. It seems that it is not reenabling them to their original state. Ben / comments

I think I may have figured out what the problem is. Here's my sequence of events: 1. Compare and sync A with B using SQL Compare. 2. Compare schemas again and everything matches. 3. Compare and...

0 votes

How can we help you today?

Ben Mills

Comments